Learning by teaching is an increasingly popular strategy in educational videos, designed to foster active learning. However, the relationship between instructional behaviors and learners’ performance in this context remains underexplored. This study employed a combination of eye-tracking and screen recording techniques to examine how learners’ behaviors while preparing for teaching through video viewing and engaging in subsequent teaching are associated with their own learning performance. The participants were 100 undergraduate students (86 females and 14 males) randomly recruited from a Chinese university, organized into 50 dyads. They engaged in face-to-face interaction, including viewing educational videos to prepare for teaching and subsequent teaching. Correlational analyses indicated that viewing behaviors, such as self-monitoring and rewinding during video viewing, were positively associated with the effectiveness of the learning by teaching strategy. Additionally, instructional behaviors involving elaboration, focused attention on instructional content, and interaction with students were positively correlated with enhanced learning performance. Lag sequential analysis and independent samples t-tests revealed that, compared to low-performers, high-performers were more likely to engage in behavioral sequences such as rewinding and clarifying during video viewing, as well as actively querying, providing feedback, adjusting teaching activities, and elaborating during instruction. Our findings on learners’ behaviors while preparing for teaching through video viewing and engaging in subsequent teaching provided practical insight for the learning by teaching strategy in video lectures to promote active learning. Educational practitioners are encouraged to create opportunities that foster effective learning and teaching interactions identified in this study, and to implement targeted support interventions to enhance the effectiveness of the learning by teaching strategy in educational videos.
AinsworthS.Van LabekeN. (2004). Multiple forms of dynamic representation. Learning and Instruction, 14(3), 241–255.
2.
BakemanR.GottmanJ. (1997). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
3.
BarghJ. A.SchulY. (1980). On the cognitive benefits of teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(5), 593.
4.
BelletierC.NormandA.HuguetP. (2019). Social-facilitation-and-impairment effects: From motivation to cognition and the social brain. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 28(3), 260–265.
5.
ChiM. T. H.BassokM.LewisM. H.ReimannP.GlaserR. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145–182.
6.
ChiM. T. H.WylieR. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243.
7.
CohenP. A.KulikJ. A.KulikC.-L. C. (1982). Educational outcomes of tutoring: A meta-analysis of findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19(2), 237–248.
8.
ColemanE. B.BrownA. L.RivkinI. D. (1997). The effect of instructional explanations on learning from scientific texts. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(4), 347–65.
9.
CraigS. D.SullinsJ.WitherspoonA.GholsonB. (2006). The deep-level-reasoning-question effect: The role of dialogue and deep-level-reasoning questions during vicarious learning. Cognition and Instruction, 24, 565–591.
10.
FiorellaL. (2023). Making sense of generative learning. Educational Psychology Review, 35(2), 50.
11.
FiorellaL.MayerR. E. (2013). The relative benefits of learning by teaching and teaching expectancy. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 38, 281–288.
12.
FiorellaL.MayerR. E. (2014). Role of expectations and explanations in learning by teaching. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39(2), 75–85.
13.
FiorellaL.MayerR. E. (2015). The Cambridge handbook of learning as a generative activity. Cambridge University Press.
14.
FiorellaL.MayerR. E. (2016). Eight ways to promote generative learning. Educational Psychology Review, 28(4), 717–741.
15.
FiorellaL.StullA. T.KuhlmannS.MayerR. E. (2020). Fostering generative learning from video lessons: Benefits of instructor-generated drawings and learner-generated explanations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(5), 895–906.
16.
FuQ. K.LinC. J.HwangG. Z.ZhangL. X. (2019). Impacts of a mind mapping-based contextual gaming approach on EFL students’ writing performance, learning perceptions and generative uses in an English course. Computers & Education, 137, 59–77.
HegartyM. (2004). Dynamic visualizations and learning: Getting to the difficult questions. Learning and Instruction, 14(3), 343–351.
19.
HöfflerT. N.SchwartzR. N. (2011). Effects of pacing and cognitive style across dynamic and non-dynamic representations. Computers & Education, 57(2), 1716–1726.
20.
HoogerheideV.DeijkersL.LoyensS. M. M.HeijltjesA.van GogT. (2016). Gaining from explaining: Learning improves from explaining to fictitious others on video, not from writing to them. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 44–45, 95–106.
21.
HsiaoJ. C.ChenS. K.SunnyW.C.LinS. J. (2022). Developing a plugged-in class observation protocol in high-school blended STEM classes: Student engagement, teacher behaviors and student-teacher interaction patterns. Computers & Education, 178, Article 104403.
22.
HungI-C.Kinshuk, & ChenN. S. (2018). Embodied interactive video lectures for improving learning comprehension and retention. Computers & Education, 117, 116–131.
23.
KailR. V. (2019). Scientific writing for psychology: Lessons in clarity and style (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
24.
KobayashiK. (2019a). Interactivity: A potential determinant of learning by preparing to teach and teaching. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 2755.
25.
KobayashiK. (2019b). Learning by preparing-to-teach and teaching: A meta-analysis. Japanese Psychological Research, 61(3), 192–203.
26.
KobayashiK. (2022a). Learning by teaching face-to-face: The contributions of preparing-to-teach, initial-explanation, and interaction phases. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 37, 551–566.
27.
KobayashiK. (2022b). Teaching others as a strategy for learning: A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychology Review, 34(2), 623-652.
28.
KobayashiK. (2024). Interactive learning effects of preparing to teach and teaching: A meta‑analytic approach. Educational Psychology Review, 36, 26.
29.
LachnerA.JacobL.HoogerheideV. (2021). Learning by writing explanations: Is explaining to a fictitious student more effective than self-explaining?Learning and Instruction, 74, Article 101438.
30.
LiaoC.-H.WuJ.-Y. (2023). Learning analytics on video-viewing engagement in a flipped statistics course: Relating external video-viewing patterns to internal motivational dynamics and performance. Computers & Education, 197, Article 104754.
31.
LinY.-C.LiuT.-C.KalyugaS. (2022). Strategies for facilitating processing of transient information in instructional videos by using learner control mechanisms. Instructional Science, 50(6), 863–877.
32.
LinY. T.LinY. G. (2016). Effects of mental process integrated nursing training using mobile device on students’ cognitive load, learning attitudes, acceptance, and achievements. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 1213–1221.
33.
LiouH. C. (2000). Assessing learner strategies using computers: New insights and limitations. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 13(1), 65–78.
34.
MayerR. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions. Educational Psychologist, 32, 1–19.
35.
MayerR. E.FiorellaL. (2022). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. Cambridge University Press.
36.
NoetelM.GriffithS.DelaneyO.SandersT.ParkerP.del Pozo CruzB.LonsdaleC. (2021). Video improves learning in higher education: A systematic review. Review of Educational Research, 91(2), 204–236.
37.
OkitaS. Y.SchwartzD. L. (2013). Learning by teaching human pupils and teachable agents: The Importance of Recursive Feedback. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 22 (3), 375–412.
38.
OuyangF.WuM.ZhangL.XuW.ZhengL.CukurovaM. (2023). Making strides towards AI-supported regulation of learning in collaborative knowledge construction. Computers in Human Behavior142, Article 107650.
39.
PiZ.GuoX.LiuC.YangJ. (2023). Students with low prior knowledge learn more when explaining to a peer than to a teacher after viewing educational videos. Active Learning in Higher Education. Advance Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/14697874231212260
40.
PiZ.HongJ.HuW. (2019). Interaction of the originality of peers’ ideas and students’ openness to experience in predicting creativity in online collaborative groups. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(4), 1801–1814.
41.
PiZ.LiuC.MengQ.YangJ. (2022). Co-learner presence and praise alters the effects of learner-generated explanation on learning from video lectures. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19, 58.
42.
PiZ.ZhangY.ShiD.GuoX.YangJ. (2022). Is self-explanation better than explaining to a fictitious student when learning from video lectures?British Journal of Educational Technology, 53, 2012–2028.
43.
PiZ.ZhangY.YuQ.YangJ. (2023). A familiar peer improves students’ behavior patterns, attention, and performance when learning from video lectures. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, 47.
44.
PiZ.ZhangY.ZhouW.XuK.ChenY.YangJ.ZhaoQ. (2021). Learning by explaining to oneself and a peer enhances learners’ theta and alpha oscillations while watching video lectures. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(2), 659–679.
45.
RibosaJ.DuranD. (2023). Students’ feelings of social presence when creating learning-by-teaching educational videos for a potential audience. International Journal of Educational Research, 117, 102128.
46.
Rittle-JohnsonB.SaylorM.SwygertK. E. (2008). Learning from explaining: Does it matter if mom is listening?Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 100, 215–224.
47.
RoscoeR. D. (2014). Self-monitoring and knowledge-building in learning by teaching. Instructional Science, 42, 327–51.
48.
RoscoeR. D.ChiM. T. H. (2008). Tutor learning: The role of explaining and responding to questions. Instructional Science, 36, 321–350.
49.
SchneiderS.NebelS.BeegeM.ReyG. D. (2018). The autonomy-enhancing effects of choice on cognitive load, motivation and learning with digital media. Learning and Instruction, 58, 161–172.
50.
SeoK.DodsonS.HarandiN. M.RobersonN.FelsS.RollI. (2021). Active learning with online video: The impact of learning context on engagement. Computers & Education, 165, Article 104132.
51.
ShadiewF.ChienL.-H.LinC.-Y. (2015). Cognitive overload and its impact on performance in digital learning environments. Educational Technology & Society, 18(3), 77–88.
52.
ShortJ.WilliamsE.ChristieB. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. Wiley.
53.
SweeneyD. S. (2018). The effect of enhanced navigational affordances on college learners’ comprehension of informational auditory text, and the role of metacognitive and motivational factors [Doctoral dissertation]. Texas A & M University.
VandewaetereM.ClareboutG. (2013). Cognitive load of learner control: Extraneous or germane load?Education Research International, 902809.
58.
WiseA. F.CuiY. (2018). Learning communities in the crowd: Characteristics of content related interactions and social relationships in MOOC discussion forums. Computers & Education, 122, 221–242.
59.
WittwerJ.NücklesM.RenklA. (2010). Using a diagnosis-based approach to individualize instructional explanations in computer-mediated communication. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 9–23.
60.
WittrockM. C. (1974). Learning as a generative process. Educational Psychologist, 11(2), 87–95.
61.
YuQ.GouJ.LiY.PiZ.YangJ. (2024). Introducing support for learner control: Temporal and organizational cues in educational videos. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(3), 933–956.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
